HIERARCHY
339
HIERARCHY
the bishop is moderately monarchical, i. e., not tyran-
nical or autocratic. This is to be interred also from
the position of the presbyters, (ii) Presbyters. —
According to all texts previously quoted the presby-
terate is the bishop's advisory council and his support,
and constitutes with him a governing body which has
a claim to due reverence and obedience, while it-
self subordinate to him (ad Trail., xii, 2; ad Eph.,
iv, 1; cf. Polyc, v, 2). (iii) Deacons. — (Texts already
cited). They are subordinate to the bishop and the
presbjrters, and have a right to honour and esteem
(ad Magn., ii, 1). In ad Trail., ii, 3, is the most im-
portant passage: "But those, too, who are deacons of
the mysteries of Jesus Christ should in every wise be
acceptable to all. For they are not deacons of meat
and drink, but servants {v-rrrip^Tai) of the Church of
God. Therefore they should protect themselves
against accusation as they would against fire." The
sense is, evidently, that in the Eucharistic celebration
they handle as deacons no ordinary food and common
drink, but a mystical food.
(d) Rights of the Community. — A community as chief seat of authority not only receives no mention from Ignatius, but such a conception is in direct contradiction to all the principal texts of his Epistles. The community is to he consulted on the question of sending envoys to other Churches (ad Philad., x, 2; ad Smyrn., xi, 2; Polyc, vii, 2). The first passage shows that the bishop or the presbyters could also fill the office of envoys. As the choice was naturally made by the organized community — i. e., with bishop and priests presiding — we can say nothing definite about the part taken by the community, since the sources make no mention of it.
(e) Divine Origin of the Hierarchy. — In spite of the clearly worded passages given above under (b) (i), even Catholics have denied that St. Ignatius was aware of a Divine origin for the hierarchy: "St. Ignatius does not teach the Divine origin of this hierarchy in the sense of its institution by God, or by Christ, in the form of three degrees — and it is intelligible why he does not." (Genouillac, " L'Eglise chr^t. au temps de S. Ignaced'Antioche",p. 132.) This is a question of words. Genouillac grants that Ignatius taught very clearly the Divine institution of the spiritual governing power in general: "It would be difficult to express the Divine origin and right of the ecclesiastical powers with greater insistence and clearness than does St. Ignatius in these texts." (Ibid., 135.) If anyone had asked St. Ignatius whether bishops, priests, and dea- cons, constituted in such a threefold dignity and en- dowed with such authority over the community, were a commandment of God {iin-oXj) toO SioO), he would have answered "Yes", as anyone who has eyes to read must see from our texts. He does not seem, however, to have entered into further speculations on the matter. But the hierarchy as a "commandment of God" is the very essence of Catholic teaching on this point. Many other additions made by later times to this concept of a Divinely originated hierarchy are to be ascribed to the development of the Church, her dis- cipline, and her canon law. No serious historian would expect to find all that in the writings of Igna- tius.
However much he may insist on the Divinely ap- pointed hierarchical gradation, on episcopal author- ity, and on the obedience that the faithful owe to their ecclesiastical superiors, Ignatius shows throughout that he does not regard this organization as an end in itself, but as a means to the end, to the attainment of perfect unity in faith and religious life. He shows himself in this point an intelligent disciple of the Apostle of the Gentiles, a Christian to the core, an ivTjp irvevixaTiKb^ in the beet sense of the word. It is also evident that the ideal of unity between bishop, priests, deacons, and community was not found everywhere. Ignatius is convinced that the threefold governing power, de-
creed and established by God and Christ, belongs to
the idea of the Church.
(4) The Epistle of Polycarp to the Pliilippians and the "Passio Polycarpi". — Polycarp also exhorts the faithful to be subject to the priests and deacons as to God and Christ (v, 3). The particular functions of each of these two classes of the governing body cannot be inferred from the qualities in which Polycarp de- sires they shoukl both be conspicuous (v and vi). The letter seems to indicate that at that time there was no bishop in Philippi. In the " Passio Poljxarpi" we are interested only in the one passage where there Ls mention of an Apostolic and prophetic teacher and bishop of the Catholic Church of SmjTna (xvi, 2). It gave great satisfaction when the bishop possessed mi- raculous charismata and when he, the teacher of the faithful, was a disciple of the Apostles.
(5) The Epistle of St. Barnabas mentions the twelve Apostles as chosen by Christ to preach his Gospel (v; ix; viii, 3). Once (xi.x, 9) he admonishes us to love the preacher of the Word of the Lord as the apple of our eye. Besides this, there are allusions to a sort of secret doctrine of the Lord, which is understood by the initiated (ix, 9, and x, 12). The writer of the Epistle evidently looks on this higher form of knowl- edge as an extraordinary gift imparted by the Spirit of God (cf. xvi, 8-10, and xvii). He considers his own exposition of the Scriptures as the effect of the Spirit working within him, even if he twice insists modestly on the point that he is not WTiting as a teacher (is SiSdcricaXos) (i, S, and iv, 9).
(6) Another kind of mysticism is revealed to us in the homily which has come down to us as the Second Epistle of St. clement. St. Paul's image of the Church as the Body of Clirist is developed, not very success- fully, in an obscure speculation about a Church which pre-existed with Jesus and was created before sun and moon (xiv, 1-4). The presbyters mentioned in xvii (3, 5) must exhort and declare the Word of God in the presence of those assembled for Divine worship.
(7) The "Pastor" of Hermas. — We must exclude from our positive exposition a number of rather wide- spread but incorrect views about the hierarchy of the " Pastor " of Hermas. (a) It cannot be ascertained with certaintv whether the Apostles mentioned in five places (Vis., iii, 5, 1; Sim., ix, 15, 4; 16, 5; 17, 1;25, 2) are apostles in the broader sense (Harnack, Zahn), or only the Twelve (Dorsch) ; the latter is more probable, (b) In either case Hermas regards the Apostolate as a thing of the past, (c) The prophets, to whom Her- mas himself belongs, are never spoken of in connexion with the Apostles and teachers; Hermas's silence, however, is not due to modesty, as his display of self- importance in Vis., iii, 1, plainly demonstrates, but to his concept of the prophet's office; for though he looks upon it as a social charisma, he accords it only a pri- vate authority, that allows each of the faithful to pass his own judgment on its validity (cf . Dor.sch in " Zeit- schrift fur Kath. Theol.", xxviii, 1904, 'pp. 276 sq.). (d) Consequently one cannot prove from Hermas that the triad of "Apostles, prophets, and teachers", held the highest place in the community as preachers of the Word of God. (e) There is absolutely no truth in Har- nack's assertion ("Analecta zu Hatch", 230 sq., and " Prolegomena zur Lehre der 12 Apostel ", pp. 150 sq.) that Hermas never mentions bishops and deacons, where there is question of the community as a system composed of rulers and sul^jects (cf. Zeitschrift fur Kath. Theologie, xxvii, 1903, pp. 19S sq.).
The following certain conclusions can be derived from Hermas : (a) The superiors are called presbj-ters (Vis., ii, 4, 2; Vis., iii, 1, 7, 8; Vis., iii, 11,3); bishops and deacons (Vis., iii, 5, 1; Sim., ix, 27, 2, bishops alone; Sim., 26, 2, deacons alone), vpo-nyoiixivoi. ttjs 4KK\ricrias Vis., ii, 2, 6); together with irpwroKaSeSprToi (Vis., iii, 9, 7) ; pastors {pastores; no Greek text; Sim., ix, 31, 5 and 6). (b) Since Hermas has no exact and fixed termi-
